War is upon us ... assemble the unicorns!
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
Writing headlines like the one above is a daily reminder of how awesome my job is. Can you imagine a top-tier business executive beginning a staff meeting with that phrase? I mean, I’d totally work for that dude, but I don’t think he exists outside of “Saturday Night Live.” Even if he did, I doubt he’d be very successful in our line-of-sight, straightforward-thinking corporate world.
And that’s a shame. Answers to questions are important, of course, but I think the true value in solving any problem is the journey toward the solution. “The journey is the destination,” as they say. I think the discussion surrounding the problem and the different perspectives lent and gained in pursuit of the most accurate and concise explanation possible is where true answers are found.
This probably explains why my thought process resembles the flight pattern of a housefly in a lightbulb factory.
See what I mean? I don’t think in straight lines, especially when I’m trying to solve a problem.
For example: last Thursday, North Korea’s government-run news organization, the Korean Central News Agency, said it had “reconfirmed” the exact location where King Dongmyeong (Korea’s founding father) had lovingly buried his unicorn.
I’m totally serious. Google it.
According to the Korean government, King Dongmyeong, founder of the Ancient Korean Kingdom of Goguryeo, Korea’s version of our beloved George Washington, unified his countrymen and brought peace to the region on the back of a creature that travels by rainbow, has healing powers, can only be captured by a virgin and, most importantly, exists only in fairytales.
Now, most people would read that, laugh, shrug, and go about their day. They’d discount the idea of unicorn-riding Korean kings as a ridiculous notion, and the discussion would end. However, because I’m a journalist and I am incapable of accepting things at face value, I had questions. Serious questions. These questions included, but were not limited to the following:
“Was his army comprised of Oompa Loompas?”
“Did he use dragons for air support?”
“Were Bugs Bunny and Wiley Coyote employed to keep morale high during the winter campaigns?”
While stupid, these questions lead me to a new perspective on the region.
If a government is brazen enough to feed something like that to its own people, presumably because the people of said country would believe it, should we really fear or be suspicious of them? Do they really pose a threat, or are they simply following the only doctrine they’ve ever known? Are they dangerous and vengeful, or simply ignorant and misinformed?
Furthermore, if you should decide that these people have never known anything else and are simply following the only information, direction and leadership available to them, shouldn’t we, as free Americans, lend a helping hand?
OK. Take a deep breath; calm down; relax. I’m getting off the soap box. My intent is not to make you feel guilty because you didn’t tell North Korea that unicorns aren’t real. However, I do think it’s a good example of why you should think critically, if not abstractly, about new ideas that might be contrary to your point of view and how they affect the world around you. I’m afraid that not enough people do, and I’m worried about what that means.
You see, I’m not a big fan of the phrase, “The problem with this country is ...” because that statement implies that we’ve only got one problem. We don’t. We have many, many problems, and I can’t tell you how happy I am that we’ve got so many different problems, because most of them stem from our diversity.
That is what makes our country great. I would dare to say that within our borders resides at least one representative from every culture, religion, socio-economic status and race in the world. We’re only human, and there’s only so much space, so we’re bound to disagree. We’re going to scream. We’re going to yell. We’re going to fight. Like I said, we’re only human and nobody’s perfect.
For proof of this kind of disagreement on a national level, I would direct your attention to the Nov. 6 elections. For proof of this kind of disagreement on a local level, I would direct your attention to the current water rights negotiations.
I believe these disagreements are healthy, worthwhile and essential to our culture — but it only works if both sides listen while the other is speaking.
Buzzing back to high school when I started dating, I learned very quickly that disagreements, (and more importantly, resolving disagreements) is essential to a relationship. If you’re passive-aggressive and hide what’s wrong, the first fight will be the last. You need to be open; there needs to be understanding; both parties have to be willing to give a little; and you need to know that it’s all right to disagree. You need to know that once the dust settles and it’s all in the open, things will go back to normal.
I had a professor in college tell me that I should never ignore someone simply because they have a point of view that differs from mine. “You might find that they’ve got it more right than you, but you’ll never know if you don’t listen,” he said.
Following his advice was difficult, to be sure. Engaging in these discussions entails a lot of risk, especially if the idea being discussed is something you’ve built a life around; something core to your belief system. If they prove you wrong, who are you? You have to start over, and the prospect is understandably terrifying.
I think it’s because of that looming danger that so many refuse to enter into a dialogue at all. It’s much easier to simply call the other person crazy and dismiss their ideas than be openminded and take the risk of being proved wrong.
And that, right there, that’s what needs to change.
We need to be able to take that risk of being proved wrong. We need to be able to express ourselves and disagree with each other without tearing ourselves to pieces. This is the only way to move forward as a community and as a country.
If both sides are not willing to take that chance and discuss what’s best for everyone rather than what’s best for the individual, the first fight will be the last.
